Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sri. Bora Swami Naidu

DRT31 Jan 2025OA/80/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's application for recovery of Rs. 52.65 Lakh owed by defendants. The court held the bank established its claim and granted relief including future interest, attachment of mortgaged property, and issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 52,65,959/- with interest @ 10.80% p.a. less paid sum. Permission to proceed against mortgaged property and defendants' assets. Recovery certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus Sri. Bora Swami Naidu — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THrS THE 31sr DAy OF JANUARY,2025

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶4

OA.No.8O ot 2024

¶5

Between :

¶6

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 2nd floor, fSRTC Commuter Amenity Centre, Bus Terminal complex, Koti, Hyderabad - 500 095. Rep by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Sri Bora Swami Naidu, s/o Sri China Venkataramana, major, male, Road no.8, R/o H. No.B-43/B/U/ 17 / r/B/ t, Street no.2, Near AyyappaSwamy Temple, Balaji hills, Boduppal, Hyderabad - 500 039.

¶10

Also at:

¶11

H.No.4- 123 / 2, Peerzadiguda, Near Auto Stand, Uppal, Hyderabad - 500 039.

¶12

Smt Bora Ammulu, w/o Sri Bora Swami Naidu, major, female, R/o^plot no,L2I, balaji hills, Boduppal, Hyderabad

¶13

Also at:

¶14

H.No.4- I23 / 2,^peerzad ig uda, Near Auto Stand, Uppal, Hyderabad - 500 039.

¶15

(oA.No.80/2024)

¶16

Counsel for the^parties:

¶17

For the Applicant

¶18

For the Defendants

¶19

Sri P.V. Satyanarayana

¶20

Exparte

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The Applicant Bank filed the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.52,65,3S9/_ (Rupees Fifty Two Lakhs Sixty Five Thousand Three Hundred and Fifty Nine only) with interest @ 10.80o/o p.a with monthly rests From date of application til the date of rearization and in defaurt for sare of mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶23

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendants avaired term roan of Rs.51.50 rakhs on 08.10.2021 against mortgage of schedule mentioned immovable property. The defendants executed agreement of roan dated 0g.10.2021 and deposited Regd sare deed no.1724/2ott dated 17.03.2011 with an intention to create equitabre mortgage of property. After avairing the roan facirity, the defendants faired to compry the terms of sanction, n"nau the :B^rirent bank was constrained to classify the issued demand notice dated account ", @%@}.'o"0 20.06.2\n{f^N rnspit#of seJerat requests and demands, the defenda nts noJ.itul&illJlUt,trt#ains. Hence this oA.

¶24

(oA.No.80/2024)

¶25

DeFendants 1 to 3 called absent and set exparte on 08.07.2024.

¶26

sri P. Prabhakar, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.10. The Applicant bank filed a part satisfaction memo stating that a sum of Rs.g,Og,249/- was paid by defendants after filing of OA.

¶27

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶28

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is

¶29

entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as

¶30

prayed for?

¶31

7 ' Defendants remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.10. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has estabrished their claim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Appricant Bank is entitred to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶32

B. is allowed with costs, as under: and severally liable to pay to the

¶33

1 ;elt zozs tsank a tota I of Rs.52,65,959/- (Rupees Fifty Two

¶34

¶35

(OA.No.80/2024)

¶36

Lakhs Sixty Five Thousand Three Hundred and Fifty Nine only) with interest @ 10.80% p.a from date of application till the date of realization LESS a sum of Rs.g,Og,24g/_ paid by defendants towards part satisfaction;

¶37

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the schedule mentioned mortgaged property towards realization of the debt due.

¶38

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person

¶39

and properties of defendants towards rea lization of the debt due.

¶40

11, The Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA.

¶41

The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date

¶42

of receipt of order.

¶43

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶44

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶45

(Dictated to the p.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 3lstday of Jan, 2025)

¶46

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶47

3 1 JAtl ?025

¶48

Nwffi
^3*,.[i!J:',r,:^"

¶49

State Bank of India v. Sri. Bora Swami Naidu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sri. Bora Swami Naidu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bharath traders Alam and Jaggary merchants versus Hdfc Bank

Mr P Chinnakommulu versus City Union Bank Limited

M S Gnr Products India versus State Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Valluri Dhanunjaya Rao

D Sadanand and others versus Indian Bank

K Manohar Reddy versus Reliance Asset Reconstruction Company Limited